Skip to main content
Associate
November 18, 2025
Solved

CubeIDE 2.0 does not open .ioc files

  • November 18, 2025
  • 9 replies
  • 9835 views

Hello,

Has the integrated support for CubeMX been removed in the new CubeIDE?

I just updated to the latest (2.0) and now, when clicking on the ioc file of a project (created with previous version 1.19), CubeMX opens up.

The top right corner has also changed.

Dega_0-1763486445192.png

Also all the new project dialogs have changed, and it does not generate an ioc file anymore... Did my update went wrong somehow?

Best answer by Andrew Neil

@Dega wrote:

Has the integrated support for CubeMX been removed in the new CubeIDE??


Yes.

See the pinned post: STM32CubeIDE 2.0.0 released.

 

PS:

See also: STM32CubeIDE 2.0.0 - interoperability instead of integration

 

PPS:

See this post (by @TDK ) on how to start an external editor from within the IDE.

9 replies

Issamos
Lead III
November 18, 2025

Hello @Dega 

As you can see here, ´STM32CubeIDE is now independent from STM32CubeMX.´ so, yes CubeMX plug-in is removed from the STM32CubeIDE.

Best Regards.

II

Andrew Neil
Andrew NeilBest answer
Super User
November 18, 2025

@Dega wrote:

Has the integrated support for CubeMX been removed in the new CubeIDE??


Yes.

See the pinned post: STM32CubeIDE 2.0.0 released.

 

PS:

See also: STM32CubeIDE 2.0.0 - interoperability instead of integration

 

PPS:

See this post (by @TDK ) on how to start an external editor from within the IDE.

A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked.A complex system designed from scratch never works and cannot be patched up to make it work.
DegaAuthor
Associate
November 18, 2025

Ah I see...

And I also missed this in the release document 

STM32CubeMX detached from STM32CubeIDE integration
– User authentication removed
– ST-MCU-FINDER-PC removed

 

Thanks!

Visitor II
November 22, 2025

There was a well-functioning integrated system, but it had to be ruined by disintegration.

Visitor II
November 23, 2025

This is the sunset on STM32cubeIDE

Its a right time for switchover to VCS

 

fred bar
Senior
December 3, 2025

Could be the plan they have in mind. ***pify the ide so that we jump on the new shiny thing a product manager somewhere made sexy.

Visitor II
November 26, 2025
  • Memory footprint and performance: Removing STM32CubeMX integration reduces installation size (~3.7GB to 2.9GB) and lowers CPU/RAM usage, improving stability especially on Linux and Mac. 

So... if you can't fix it, feature it?

Unbelievable. Why would you do this?

 

fred bar
Senior
November 26, 2025

Anyone at ST understood the concept of "INTEGRATED Development Editor"?

STM32CubeIDE should be renamed "jump-from-app-to-app Development Inconvenience"

What a crappy move, ST. What a crappy move.
And your reasons are *** too... we will need to install cubeMX too anyways, which will take MORE RAM and MORE SPACE, cause Eclipse reload problems when changing files on the fly, ..... 
I'm pretty pissed.

TZiel.1
Associate II
December 2, 2025

This is idiotic. Take a functioning Integrated development environment, and turn it into separate pieces that don't work well, or together anymore. Congratulations?  It was working, now it doesn't and has a ton of new access and compatibility and synchronization issues it has never had before!

Associate II
December 9, 2025

Unbelievable this happened. Over the years, CubeIDE has become a very good well integrated environment and with this move it degraded to a *** tool for working on STM32 projects. 

I immediately uninstalled version 2 and went back to version 1.19 which luckily still works as expected.

ST, please return the integrated access to IOC files since this is what is needed for an integrated development environment. All the mentioned reasons for decoupling may be true but only focus on the advantages. The main topic is usability and this is hurt bigtime.

Andrew Neil
Super User
December 9, 2025

@Leon3 see this thread for a discussion on the change: IDE Version 2.0.0 - why remove MX?

A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked.A complex system designed from scratch never works and cannot be patched up to make it work.
Associate
December 11, 2025

Why did you ruin a perfectly good and smoothly functioning system like this? Everything could be done within a single program; why now do we have to use two separate programs and also consider their compatibility? Please think about beginners and enthusiasts, and bring back the previous feature. There's no logical explanation for changing this just to save a few MB of RAM.

Andrew Neil
Super User
December 11, 2025

@Baris_DSP wrote:

 just to save a few MB of RAM.


No, That's not the reason - See the discussion here

A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked.A complex system designed from scratch never works and cannot be patched up to make it work.